Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
The High Court suspended petitioners from service for allegedly accepting illegal gratification. The suspension orders were stayed by the Court twice. As more than eight months had passed without the suspension taking effect, petitioners were allowed to continue in service pending disciplinary proceedings. The charge memos were issued, and disciplinary actions initiated. Petitioners not affected by suspension were permitted to work, subject to ongoing proceedings. The suspension orders were deemed ineffective, and petitioners could continue in service with possible reassignment. The Tribunal's challenged orders were not enforced. Petitioners' service continued with posting orders. Petition disposed of.
The High Court suspended petitioners from service for allegedly accepting illegal gratification. The suspension orders were stayed by the Court twice. As more than eight months had passed without the suspension taking effect, petitioners were allowed to continue in service pending disciplinary proceedings. The charge memos were issued, and disciplinary actions initiated. Petitioners not affected by suspension were permitted to work, subject to ongoing proceedings. The suspension orders were deemed ineffective, and petitioners could continue in service with possible reassignment. The Tribunal's challenged orders were not enforced. Petitioners' service continued with posting orders. Petition disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.